Here's my beef with Mr. Washington. While I am 100% in the self-reliance camp, self-reliance is a toothless tiger without political power because without it you don't have sustainability. That and he was anti-civil rights.
Plus the Atlanta compromise was some bµllsh!t. For those who don't know, the Atlanta Compromise address was a speech which outlined Washington's philosophy on race matters. In this speech, he called on white America to provide jobs and industrial-agricultural education for Negroes. In exchange, blacks would give up demands for social equality and civil rights.
Washington and DuBois had valid points, but Garvey got it right.
Here's my beef with Mr. Washington. While I am 100% in the self-reliance camp, self-reliance is a toothless tiger without political power because without it you don't have sustainability. That and he was anti-civil rights.
Plus the Atlanta compromise was some bµllsh!t. For those who don't know, the Atlanta Compromise address was a speech which outlined Washington's philosophy on race matters. In this speech, he called on white America to provide jobs and industrial-agricultural education for Negroes. In exchange, blacks would give up demands for social equality and civil rights.
Let me take it one step further.
The philosophy of Washington was one of accommodation to white oppression. He advised blacks to trust the paternalism of the southern whites and accept the fact of white supremacy.
Clarence Thomas and Uncle Ruckus both approve
I learned about this in American history. Washington believed we needed to work for whites and prove ourselves equal and Dubois said we should demand it. That's what I learned. I was too quick to groan u.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free
Dubois grew up privileged (by a black person's standards in that time period), free and up North.
Washington was born a slave, poor and Southener. The argument between them is valid but also like comparing apples and oranges.
They grew up completely different!
Washington used the Atlanta Compromise speech and it's content to get blacks an opportunity to finally get an education. If you're gonna discuss his writings and speeches I urge you to do them in context and not just by pulling out quotes.
All y'all Booker T fans....
Do you accept white supremacy?
If the almighty white man gave y'all the keys to the middle class kingdom in exchange for you accepting him as the rightful ruler of this country, would you accept?
Both are flawed in some way though. I guess coming up poor, you take what you can get. Washington was probably more practical though considering him wanting blacks to just focus on learning a trade for the moment.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free
And controversial, cause it was right at the peak of the industrial revolution. Many still felt sharecropping was the only way to really make a living, while the country was in the midst of an economical shift.
Here's my beef with Mr. Washington. While I am 100% in the self-reliance camp, self-reliance is a toothless tiger without political power because without it you don't have sustainability. That and he was anti-civil rights.
Plus the Atlanta compromise was some bµllsh!t. For those who don't know, the Atlanta Compromise address was a speech which outlined Washington's philosophy on race matters. In this speech, he called on white America to provide jobs and industrial-agricultural education for Negroes. In exchange, blacks would give up demands for social equality and civil rights.
Let me take it one step further.
The philosophy of Washington was one of accommodation to white oppression. He advised blacks to trust the paternalism of the southern whites and accept the fact of white supremacy.
He was ahead of his time. We have those now. We call them Cornel West, Tyler Perry, and Lee Daniels.
How about Sharpton, Jackson, Dyson.....countless others?